Blanche, appearing on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” confirmed that appealing the losses is “absolutely, it’s a possibility.” The remarks come as the Justice Department presses lawsuits against 30 states and Washington, D.C., for refusing to hand over voter roll data the Trump administration demanded under an executive order earlier this year.
The Voter Roll Standoff
The executive order at the center of the dispute asks states to turn over detailed voter information — names, dates of birth, residential addresses, driver’s license numbers, and the last four digits of Social Security numbers. The administration says it needs the data to investigate “deficiencies” and “anomalies” in voter rolls, including whether noncitizens are improperly registered.
While some states have voluntarily complied, most have not. Federal judges in Oregon and Michigan have sided with states seeking to block the federal government’s access, bringing the Justice Department’s loss count to 22 and climbing.
The resistance cuts across party lines. Republican-led states including Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Georgia, and Vermont have joined Democratic-led states in refusing the request — a rare bipartisan consensus that election administration belongs at the state level, not in Washington.
Vermont’s Republican Governor Phil Scott told “Meet the Press” last month that state officials are better positioned to run elections than the federal government. Elections have always been administered by states, and the federal government does not typically maintain voter rolls.
Blanche Defends DOJ’s Aggressive Posture
Blanche, confirmed by the Senate earlier this month after serving as acting attorney general since April, framed the voter roll litigation as a core Justice Department function.
“Election integrity is something that President Trump ran on, and the American people elected him,” Blanche said. “It’s something that every American should care about. And so the idea that the Department of Justice is trying to investigate issues around elections to make sure they’re fair and make sure they’re conducted the right way is not something that we should be running away from.”
He added: “We’re not going to stop doing what I think every American should expect us to do, which is make sure that we have elections that are fair. And as that relates to the Department of Justice, that means making sure there are no constitutional legal violations, even at the state level.”
A Controversial Path to Attorney General
Blanche’s route to the post was unconventional. He took over as acting attorney general after Trump fired Pam Bondi in April. Before joining the administration, Blanche served as Trump’s personal attorney in the New York criminal case that ended with the president’s conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.
His confirmation required a deal with key Republican senators, including Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas, who had concerns about a nearly $2 billion “anti-weaponization” fund tied to a Justice Department settlement with the president. Blanche told “Meet the Press” the fund is dead, repeating assurances he gave the senators: “I’ve said repeatedly: It’s dead.”
At a speech Friday in Nassau County, New York, Trump praised his new attorney general in sweeping terms. “He’s going to be the greatest, maybe ever,” the president said. “He’s got a shot at being the greatest ever, if he remains tough and strong.”
Democrats Question Blanche’s Independence
Senate Democrats used Blanche’s confirmation hearings to question whether his personal relationship with Trump would compromise his independence. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, appearing on “Meet the Press” after Blanche, offered a sharp critique of the Justice Department under new leadership.
“You have a Justice Department under Todd Blanche, for instance, that’s become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Trump cartel and Donald Trump’s extreme agenda, as opposed to standing up for the rule of law,” Jeffries said.
Blanche pushed back, telling host Kristen Welker: “I will act with integrity. Our prosecutors will act with integrity. We will prosecute without fear or any sort of favor.” He added that Trump would “never ask me to do something unethical or legal or illegal. He never has. He never will.”
What Happens Next
If the Justice Department follows through on Blanche’s suggestion and petitions the Supreme Court, the case would land before a conservative-leaning bench that has generally been skeptical of federal overreach into state election administration — even as it has shown openness to election integrity arguments. The timing is precarious: with November’s midterm elections approaching, any Supreme Court ruling would carry immediate practical consequences for how voter rolls are maintained and scrutinized.
The 22 lower-court losses so far suggest judges see the executive order as a significant overstep, regardless of which party controls the statehouse. A Supreme Court appeal would force the justices to weigh the federal government’s investigative authority against the constitutional framework that has left election administration to the states for more than two centuries.
Watch for the Justice Department to file cert petitions in the coming weeks, potentially seeking to consolidate the cases. State attorneys general are likely to coordinate their defense through the National Association of Secretaries of State and similar bodies. The outcome could redraw the boundary between federal and state power over elections for years to come — and shape the legal landscape heading into November.
— Omar Hassan, politics desk, AXO News